hydra_memory

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are present, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It does not explain side effects (e.g., 'forget' may be destructive whether it requires authentication, or what happens to the data). The description is too terse to provide adequate transparency.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single concise sentence that front-loads the primary purpose. It is efficient but could benefit from slight elaboration on the action enum options.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

There is no output schema and the description does not mention return values or effects of each action (stats, export, forget). The agent lacks context on what to expect, especially for a tool that can be destructive (forget). The description is incomplete for safe and effective use.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the parameters are fully described in the input schema. The description adds 'for a domain' which is already implied by the domain parameter. It does not provide additional meaning beyond the schema, meeting the baseline.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states 'Inspect or manage H8 web memory for a domain,' which clarifies the tool deals with memory operations. However, 'inspect or manage' is broad and could be more specific (e.g., 'Get stats, export, or forget'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like hydra_call_tool or hydra_probe but lacks explicit clarity on the exact operations.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like hydra_probe or hydra_inspect_session. There is no mention of prerequisites, when not to use it, or common use cases.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.